Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ralph Vaughan Williams/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Graham Beards via FACBot (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2015.

Ralph Vaughan Williams

 * Nominator(s):  Tim riley  talk    12:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Half a dozen British composers have been successfully steered through peer review and FAC to Featured Article status, and the present candidate is about one of England's finest and best loved. It has had the benefit of a splendidly thorough and helpful peer review, and I hope it will now be found worthy to join Elgar, Britten and their colleagues as a Featured Article. –  Tim riley  talk    12:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Support—had my say at PR. Amply meets the FA criteria in my opinion; a wonderfully written biography article that I could find precious little to quibble about. —  Cliftonian   (talk)  15:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Support also had my say at PR, meets FA criteria, the usual sound job from TR.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much, gentlemen! Your input at PR and support here are gratefully received.  Tim riley  talk    20:34, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Image review
 * Suggest scaling up both the score and the Job engraving. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review, Nikkimaria, and for the suggestion, which I'll go and experiment with, as best I can (SOS message may follow). Greatly obliged!  Tim riley  talk    11:22, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Support. Wow. A real achievement and a joy to read. We need an additional dozen Tim rileys. Ceoil (talk) 20:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Support Excellent! No nits to pick. Well done! Johnbod (talk) 03:06, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Support Satisfied with the article at PR stage. Very well done. Frank Sinatra's favourite composer, probably too trivial to mention in the article though.♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:46, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Ceoil, Johnbod and Dr. Blofeld, for your very kind comments and your support. I am most grateful. –  Tim riley  talk    11:22, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Support Another happy punter from the PR. A further read this morning shows this is stonger than it was then. - SchroCat (talk) 09:35, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, SchroCat, for your support here and your contribution at the peer review. Very much obliged.  Tim riley  talk    08:57, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Support: Superbly written highly instructive. I have a few very minor points to add to those I raised at the peer review:
 * Was Mary Vaughan Willims Darwin's only niece? If not, it should be "a niece" rather than "the niece".
 * "After the armistice" – perhaps add the date for the benefit of the historically challenged?
 * "warmly friendly" – hmm, double adverb?
 * "air-raid": I doubt the hyphen, and the OD of E agrees with me.
 * Consider these two statements:
 * "The seventh—officially unnumbered, and titled Sinfonia antartica—divided opinion; the score is a reworking of music Vaughan Williams had written for the 1948 film Scott of the Antarctic, and some critics thought it not truly symphonic." (from "Second marriage" section)
 * "The seventh symphony, the Sinfonia antartica (1952), is a by-product of the composer's score for the 1948 film Scott of the Antarctic, and reworks much of the music used for the film. From the outset, critical opinion has been divided on whether the piece can be properly classed as a symphony." (from "Music" section)


 * The two statements are very similar – maybe the second could be abbreviated.


 * In regard to VW's operas you state that "success in the operatic field eluded him". This is certainly true, relatively speaking, but should it be said unreservedly? There is evidence (you provide it) of some critical success (succés d'estime, as we learned francophones say), so you might consider modifying the absolute, slightly.

Otherwise, no fault found. A great addition to our composer biography collection. Brianboulton (talk) 11:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * All these points addressed – satisfactorily, I hope. Thank you, BB, for these suggestions, and those at peer review, and for your support and kind words here. –  Tim riley  talk    12:10, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * Missing bibliographic info for Kennedy 1984, Sackville-West and Shawe-Taylor, Cox
 * FN39: which Adams?
 * Schwarz or Schwartz?
 * Grove Music Online is sometimes italicized, sometimes not - should be done consistently
 * FN65: page?
 * FN140: think you're missing closing italics
 * FN161's title doesn't match that given in the link. More broadly, I'm not sure WorldCat is the best source for this sentence, at least not alone - it shows the existence of these recordings but not that these are the only studio recordings that he did
 * Gramophone recordings now sourced from Kennedy 1980.  Tim riley  talk    20:57, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Ralph Vaughan Williams Society or The Ralph Vaughan Williams Society?
 * FN186: missing work title for the last article
 * Alan or Alain Frogley?
 * Date for Dibble?
 * "Oxford & New York" or "Oxford and New York"? Should be consistent
 * I see two TNA pages in External links, but one is listed as "UK National Archives" and the other as "The National Archives"
 * Don't think the final EL warrants inclusion. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, Nikkimaria, for reviewing. I'll work through the points today.  Tim riley  talk    14:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * And now all attended to – satisfactorily, I hope – with the exception of the discographical point you mention (seventh bullet point, above) in re WorldCat. I'll have to dig in the sources to find a citation for the (certain, I think) statement that the ones mentioned are the composer's only commercial studio recordings.  Tim riley  talk    15:55, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * And now done.  Tim riley  talk    20:57, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Graham Beards (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.